Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
Mar 13, 2013 12:00pm PDT
this indescribable energy without getting too ahead of myself here, with you i want to bring in james salt. james, you have been critical of the church, i think by fair terms, your concerns about handling and abuse of children. so much so you started a petition to prevent certain cardinals from participating. they still did in the case of the los angeles cardinal, mahoney at the time. why are you in belief as a person whose been critical and skeptical that this is the right man at the right time. >> as a catholic who lovers the church, i'm incredibly saddened by the poor leadership from strident leadership in our church. from those who say you are wrong politically and want to speak of it in the square. this is inspiring, knowing that church can be a source of inspiration for those of us that want something more. that's what i'm seeing. the fact that he is older, tells me, that make there will be more deference on politics or guy marriage or contraception. but hopefully a shorter pontificate and he will bring about reforms needed so the next generation of leadership can come in
Mar 15, 2013 12:00pm PDT
," the president has a plan to drive our energy prices down. >> i'm steve kornacki. are we in for a flew winning streak on main street? >> i'm krystal ball. we say lean forward. cheryl sandberg says lean in. another powerful woman is telling women to lean back. >> i'm se cupp. i am in d.c. for meetings. mysterious, i know. >>> right now the president is wrapping up a big announce many at one of the energy department's largest national laboratories for scientific research. at a time of austerity, he wants to dedicate $2 billion to research for developing advance technology cars. it would come from energies paid by offshore oil and gas drilling. he is calling at this time energy security trust. he first mentioned it in his state of the union address. without this infusion of cash, research labs like the national lab four where the president is today stand to lose federal grants under the sequester. lab directors warn it will devastate u.s. scientific research for decades. the president says, it is these cutting edge breakthrough technology that's will make america a competitive jobs magnet
Mar 18, 2013 12:00pm PDT
department of energy's national laboratories. it was titled, the sequester is going to devastate u.s. science research for decades. they said this drop in funding will force to us cancel all new programs and research initiatives, probably for at least two years. is that going to put a damper on our future prospects? >> if the sequester holds in its current form for the ten years that it is supposed to, then yes, the answer is there will definitely be horrible consequences. i think before we go to the bad news, you need to give a little context. the good news is that america has been investing in research and development. it has been investing in science and technology at a very high rate. in 2009, thanks partly to the stimulus, the u.s. investment matched the previous high at the space race at 2.9 of gdp. that amount of money being poured into public and private research. so we've come down a little because of the budget cuts already put in place and we've come down much more because of the sequester. that speaks exactly to what i was argue ewing in my special report. the federal
Mar 20, 2013 12:00pm PDT
channel their extraordinary energies and entrepreneurship in more positive wayes with a resolution to this issue. the entire region i think will be healthier with a resolution to the issue. so i will keep making that argument. and i will admit that, you know, frankly, sometimes it would be easier not to make the argument. and to avoid the question. precisely becausity's hard. that's not the approach i've tried to take. and there have probably been times when i made statement about what i think needs to happen, the way it get filtered through our press, it may be interpreted in ways that get israelis nervous just like there are folks back home that sometimes get nervous about areas where they aren't sure exactly where i stand on things. that's why i like the opportunity to talk directly to you guys. hopefully you will show the live film as opposed to the edited version. with that, i think you've got four questions to answer, bb. >> i think that there's a misunderstanding about time. if iran decides to go for a nuclear weapon, that is to actually manufacture the weapon, then it probably
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4